Welcome to Librarium Online!
Join our community of 80,000+ members and take part in the number one resource for Warhammer and Warhammer 40K discussion!
Registering gives you full access to take part in discussions, upload pictures, contact other members and search everything!
Not really a rules question but more a quick discussion.
Just thinking the other day and a thought struck me. You roll to hit, wound then armour yes? Doesn't it make more sense to roll to hit, armour, wound? Or is this only in my head.
As far as I can tell it has no imact on the odds of the rolls as skipping step 3 in the first instance is the same as skipping step 2 in the second. Perhaps some rule tweeks would have to appear but this way just seems.... right, if not familiar.
The way I see it,
A bullet hits me,
My armour stops it / Doesn't stop it
I'm wounded / Unwounded.
Am I jus being an idiot?
I hear and I forget, I see and I remember, I do and I understand
Success is the ability to go from failure to failure without losing your enthusiasm.
You're right, it does make more sense that way around and if anyone wanted to make that a house rule it wouldn't effect the odds at all.
I think it was just done that way for game play purposes.
Player (a) takes his turn, in the shooting phase he rolls all his dice to hit and wound then player (b) takes his turn rolling to save.
The other way of doing it would be player (a) then player (b) then player (a) again.
Considdering what order you do it doesn't effect the odds at all I can see why they whent for the order that was slightly more streamlined.
You might find this topic more useful here:
Just as a counterpoint, have you considered that a shot not strong enough to hurt you might not punch through your armor in the first place?
Also, it's far simpler in game terms to determine accuracy and strength of an attack, and then resolve defenses.
Last edited by psichotykwyrm; December 27th, 2010 at 02:30.
"It takes a vast amount of self control to be this dangerous."
---Ogvai Ogvai Helmshrot, Jarl of Tra, VI Legion Astartes
While this makes more logical, real-life sense (which I support in wargaming rules) and would make no difference if a unit with the same weapons was shooting a unit with the same statlines and equipment, it would DRASTICALLY change how wound allocation currently works. This system would provide a big advantage to the shooter, as it would be much harder to allocate wounds so that you protect precious members of the squad such as the sergeant or heavy weapon. Also, it would slow down the game a lot of there is a bunch of shooting as the rolls to wound would have to be done individually instead of as a group.
Just my thoughts.
2nd edition had a much more cumbersome 'wound allocation' and targeting system, and indeed the games took much longer. Not just due to that, but many factors and such a wide array of wargear.
I do miss the overpowered characters of 2nd Edition, sometimes...but overall I do like what GW has done to streamline the game.
At the beginning of turn 1, I spray my opponent's army with the bacon flavored spray. Then I unleash my Boston Terrier Squiggoth who then devours their entire bacon flavored army! There is no defense against her cuteness! All are doomed!